/lit/ - Literature

you're not mature enough to grasp the concept of faith

You don't know nothing of his religious views. You have a prejudice because he is "christian" and yet you like his "ideas". His ideas are his religion and how he takes and thinks his religion. If you read more of Kierkegaard himself, either you'll turn away from his ideas or you'll understand his religious views, because they are at the core. If you like his ideas, then chance is that you'll like his religious views if only you drop that initial prejudice.

teleologically suspend the ethical

>>7180475
>be me
>live like Abraham
>become schizophrenic
>think god is telling me to kill an orphan boy that I mistakenly think is my son
>Pat myself on the back for a job well done
Thanks Jesus!!

>>7180485
That's a double negative bud

You don't have to be religious to appreciate the beauty of a religious philosophy, or personally believe in teleological suspension of the ethical or absurdity or have "faith". You needn't subscribe to every philosophy you read.

lolling at the christposters here getting angry

>>7180487
Hello reddit

>>7180468
Why would you read the pages of a ugly hunchback who everyone hated and he in turn hated humanity and thought they were a bunch of numbers? Doesn't seem like a healthy fella to subscribe to

read Camus

>girlfriend is in the 11th grade
>she told me she's learning about Existentialism in IB ELA
>only Camus and Sartre
Damned secular schools refusing to teach early existentialists and instead give it a bad name by teaching a poorly-justified hybrid of nihilism and absurdism.

Kierkegaard's philosophy could have definitely benefited had he chosen to remove the "mystic" element from his works.

I buy everything Kierkegaard says, but how do I reconcile this with the personal God who sends people to Hell forever meme?

I honestly don't see what an atheist could get out of Kierkegaard. He's a Christian existentialist. His ideas are not going to fit into the atheist worldview.

If you want a secularized Kierkegaard, read Heidegger. Otherwise, please stop trying to put your trilby on the great Dane

>>7180488
This.

All you need is a set of rules above the law and you're good. But, you know, you need to actually follow them as if God himself were telling you to do it. If you can actually form a Superego that strong without a faith in "God", then you're ubermensch tier. Good luck :)

>>7180549
>I honestly don't see what an atheist could get out of Kierkegaard
>atheist worldview

Please stop labeling all atheists as "fedora-tippers" or Dickie Dawkins fans. Most atheists are agnostic and willing to at least entertain Christian ideas. You've spent too much time looking at memes.

>>7180510
You know nothing about Kierkegaard.

Though nowadays, it is widely said, Kierkegaard did not have a hunchback.

People did not hate him. Many loved him.

He did not hate people and did not see them as numbers. He would go on long (4-5+ hours) walks through Copenhagen and enjoyed being among the people.

Please stop sullying the good name of Soren Kierkegaard.

>>7180554
I'm up for this. Need some dope rules. Someone give me some, I'll try it for a week and report back

>>7180554
Wouldn't that essentially be me becoming my own god, which I'm sure Kierkegaard would've been vehemently against.

>>7180573
Not entirely true. He felt alone, he had that thing where he was becoming well known, was the life of a party he went to and after it said he wanted to kill himself.
And he was tough on Christians i.e. everyone he knew who wasn't being Christian correctly i.e. everyone he knew including himself for a long time

>>7180498
so far religion seems to be an out of control metaphysical ontological framework based on "revelation" which ignores reality entirely. It begins where Aristotelian philosophy ended, at the concept of a being which encapsulates ideal forms of virtue. I don't get the"beauty," perhaps you're talking about a beauty that are along the same lines of harry potter and any other fantasy. This type of beauty is completely irrelevant.

>>7180582
All you gotta do is not masturbate.

>>7180468
Take the leap of faith faggot.

You're already doing it in regards to your use of linguistics and language anyways. You might as well extend it to God.

>>7180468
Get religion. It's not that hard.

>>7180591
That thing where he said he wanted to shoot himself after a party was said once, in his journal, which he never intended for publication. He likely never would have killed himself. He liked Regine and him and the king were kinda buddy buddy.

He was hard on Christians, yes. Doesn't mean he hated them. There's a lot in Kierkegaard, but I'm having trouble thinking about any examples of hate towards others.

>>7180613
>Leap of
Its a leap to faith faggot.

>>7180604
>reality
spook harder

>>7180582
Smite all journalists.

>>7180609
fug, already made it :^)

Knight of Faith status achieved

>>7180604
>religion
>ignoring reality

you're doing it wrong

>>7180631
Not so fast.

>>7180584
Well, he would by definition be against any non-Christian interpretation of his texts. But the fact is, that you theoretically *can* use his ideas in secular ways.

For lack of a better structure, let's use the ol' Ego-Id-Superego system. The Superego, ie the ethics that you ACTUALLY follow in your day to day life not the ethics that you want people to think you follow, is supposed to be "external" to you. But "you" just means your Ego. So the Superego is external from the Ego. Some kind of handwritten list comprising an elegant ethical system by which you always abide doesn't automatically become your Superego, obviously, which is why it's damn near impossible to "become your own god." You might abide by it for the first few weeks, but eventually your true Superego will creep in and tell you it's okay if you skip this time and the next time, etc.

So, again, in theory it's possible, in execution it takes a rare type of person.

>>7180582
DOPE RULES FOR A DOPE WEEK

1. NO DOPE
2. NO PORN
3. NO MASTURBATION
4. NO FICTION
5. NO ALCOHOL
6. MEDITATE EVERY DAY (10+ minutes)
7. COOK EVERY DAY
8. TAKE A WALK EVERY DAY
9. TALK TO SOMEBODY YOU HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO IN A WHILE
10. WAKE UP EARLY

>>7180582
>blindly searching for arbitrary rules above human law in an attempt to live as an ubermensch

You've already failed. Read Crime & Punishment to find out why.

Religion is a safety net for those who can't face the horrible implications of nonexistence.

>>7180609
fug, i misread it cause i've become retarded from masturbating all the time
>>7180631
Definitely have not and will never achieve Knight of Faith

>>7180662

>>7180668
>implying you aren't utterly terrified of a godless world

>>7180657
Damn, this is almost exactly what i was doing before i fell off the wagon of my porn addiction overcoming plan

>>7180672

>>7180672
>IMPLYING YOU AREN'T -- LIKE KIERKEGAARD POINTS OUT -- AFRAID OF THE EVEN MORE TERRIFYING NOTION; NAMELY THAT OF AN EXISTENCE WHICH WILL NEVER END. YOU CANNOT DIE, AND THIS MAKES YOU SO SCARED THAT YOU HAVE TO CONSTRUCT THE IDEA OF DEATH AND TRY TO CONVINCE YOURSELF THAT DEATH REALLY IS THE END.

>>7180660
more like
>>blindly searching for arbitrary rules above human law in an attempt to have something to do next week
and i won't be reading it so can you tell me why briefly

>>7180679
Why would I be afraid of immortality? It beats nonexistence by a long shot.

>>7180678
Great arguments so far. You're proving yourself to be the rational person I expected you to be.

>>7180468
You read Camus who had the same thoughts.

>>7180691
>Why would I be afraid of immortality? It beats nonexistence by a long shot.
BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE JUDGED, AND YOU AREN'T WILLING TO DISPENSE WITH YOUR EARTHLY, MATERIAL, BASE NEEDS AND DESIRES.

>>7180691
>i fear not immortality (because i haven't thought through the implications)
>i expect pure rationality in a thread about a man who wrote about something suprarational

Man, christfags are the biggest trolls there are.

>>7180700
As an ex-Roman Catholic, I kind of appreciate christfags.

>>7180691
>Why would I be afraid of immortality? It beats nonexistence by a long shot.

It's also better than eternal recurrence. The worst immortality has to offer is cosmic ennui. Eternal recurrence means I'm gonna have to be the same boring person eternally for at least the first quarter of my life.

>>7180680
Basically it's: "if you have to ask, you're not an ubermensch." The fact that you're thinking about it, rather than just being it, means that you're not it. In C&P the main character wonders if he has the right to commit crimes in the spirit of a Napoleonic figure, and comes to the conclusion that Napoleon never would have questioned himself in that way, and the fact that he's questioning himself means he is not and can never be a Napoleon.

Listen to Hubert Dreyfus lectures on him. They're great and totally secular, without excluding the religious application.

>>7180712
This just shows that he's not be exactly like Napoleon. He could still come to a set of principles, follow them, become Napoleonesque, no?

>>7180697
>>7180678
>>7180668

>AmeriBurger thinking its edgy to not believe in God
>living in the Assfarted Shits of a Americum where "intelligent design" is taught in schools.

Holy shit, kill yourself.

>>7180723

>>7180723
It really is sad, though.
t. Ameriburger

>>7180722
Nah not exactly, but that's an understandable conclusion to reach if you haven't read the book. It's not that he can't "exactly" be Napoleon, but rather than he can't be Napoleon in the archetypal sense: An ubermensch above the masses, free from the constraints of the law, the one-in-a-million man with the power to change the world, and the responsibility to commit any "crimes" necessary to do exactly that.

The main character stratifies people into two groups: (1) the "masses" who are subject to the law, and function only to maintain civilization and effectively provide breeding opportunities for great men, and (2) these great men.

His main point is that the great men don't care about the law, about societal standards, etc., and it's exactly that lack of caring that allows them to be great and do great things; he maintains that every great man is technically a "criminal" in that he overturned some existing world order, and did so without a second thought. It's that hesitation, that "second thought," that's the key: The ubermensch makes his own rules and never cares about what society tells him he should do.

So the main character's conclusion is that, because he didn't just go out and DO something, but hesitated and thought about it, means that he is not, and therefore can never be, an ubermensch.

PS These aren't really spoilers, so no worries on that front.

>>7180657
Early to bed and early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.

>>7180487

Looks like someone hasn't read Fear and Trembling yet.

>>7180662
I'd alter this a bit.

Religion is a safety net for those who think the implications of nonexistence are horrible.

An enlightened person knows that you will only ever experience life, so there's no reason to worry about not living.

>>7180753
>because he didn't just go out and DO something, but hesitated and thought about it

Which actually ties back into Kierkegaard if you've ever read the section in his "Two Ages" (also sold in abridged form as "The Present Age") where he compares the "passionate age" to the "reflective age." When people were passionate, they would just do. In a reflective age, they thought about doing it until they did nothing.

>>7180778
No I've never read that, but it sounds interesting. Have you read it? Would you recommend it? I've never seen it mentioned on /lit/; how would you compare it to his more popular works (either/or, fear and trembling)?

>>7180794
I've only read the abridged version I mentioned ("The Present Age") which is a very short and worthwhile read and explicitly highlights the comparison I mentioned. Since the abridged version is so short, I couldn't possibly compare it to the major works, but it certainly gives you a fuller understanding of K's beliefs. I recommend it wholeheartedly.

>>7180753
Still not hearing a good reason why one can't reflect and then do other than that's not what one example of a so called ubermensch did.

nietzsche considered Goethe to be one of the closest example to an ubermensch who was essentially a writer and went on about the importance of suffering, humiliation and - tellingly - doubt.

>>7180818
Reading the Wiki of Crime and Punishment and what
>>7180753
you're getting at makes more sense to me now.

Still would depend a lot on the methods and degree of change a person can make to themself.
Seems unlikely that no one at all who initially was hesitant couldn't find it within them to change themselves in an exceptional way.

>>7180564

>> Please stop labeling all atheists

Atheist is already a label

>> Most atheists are agnostic

Nope. You are using words you don't understand the meanings of again.

>>7180815
Very cool, thanks for the heads up!

>>7180818
What do you mean "reflect and then do"? My point (which I half-made just to be difficult, but there's some actual argument in it) is not that an ubermensch can't "plan" things, but that he is not to be in any way constrained by societal norms--convention, law, etc. So it's not "doubt" that's inherently bad, but rather doubt derived from a specific source, i.e., convention.

So if your plan was to invent rules for yourself that you deemed appropriate to a superior way of life, I think that could be in accordance with the idea of an ubermensch; I understood your (most likely half-joking) initial comment as a request for someone else to give you rules to live by that THEY derived: the opposite of the ubermensch path.

>>7180833
Yeah I think we're approaching the same point. Again I think the key is not hesitancy or doubt, but the source of those feelings. Hesitation stemming from fear of a failure that will prevent further activity is, I think, in line with the ubermensch ideal. But such a feeling stemming from thoughts of morality, legality, etc., is not.

>>7180836
>Nope. You are using words you don't understand the meanings of again.

Reminds me of some tumblr comment or something like that: "Not all bisexual people are attracted to men and women. Don't discriminate against someone who is bisexual but is only attracted to one gender."

>>7180845
Yes, got you now. I agree.

The only thing I think where we might disagree is that a person can identify their care and ties with convention, go about using whatever methods to reduce it whereby they no longer rationally think it to be worth anything but also more importantly get to a state where they feel within them deeply, subconsciously that it is no longer of any worth either and once that state has been achieved, go on and become an ubermensch type.

I'm not saying it's at all likely but i don't see why it'd be impossible.

But perhaps this is something you weren't objecting to being possible and i misread

>>7180870
I'm not totally sure I see what you mean. Are you suggesting that someone can exist bounded by convention, and at some later point have some awakening/revelation that renders this first state (bounded by convention) meaningless, pushing them on to a second state outside of convention (i.e., an ubermensch lifestyle)?

And if so, are you opposing that to the idea that the ubermensch path is one that has to be innate, in that if you're not on it already, you can never get on it?

Yeah

>>7180947
>>7180931
Though, it was said with the assumption that most are aware that they are bound by convention all their lives and there's just not much they can do about it rather than having an awakening it's more like making the effort to break out what they have always been half aware that they were bound by

>>7180848
those are always troll accounts bruh

>>7180573
>When the sculptor, Rikard Magnussen, proposed the idea to Lund, then in his eighties, he didn't support the proposal, he is quoted as saying, "But didn't you know what he was like? Soren Kierkegaard was a hunchback."[7]

>>7180991
That was likely said as a joke.

The whole hunchback idea can be traced to the Corsair affair, a vicious attack upon Kierkegaard. There is no record of Kierkegaard being referred to as a hunchback before then and that seems suspicious that it wouldn't be in any of the documents from when he was in the military (funnily enough, he lasted one day in the military)

>>7180870
>I'm not saying it's at all likely but i don't see why it'd be impossible.

I'm not any of the anons you've been replying to but what you have to understand about Dosty is that he's not trying to publish a scientific paper, or claim a priori it's impossible. He's confronting the possibility of moral nihilism by saying "I believe there is an inherent moral current in most men that prevents moral nihilism from being a realistic doctrine to live by, once you put it into action".

Think of it like this, Usain Bolt ran the 100m in 9.58 seconds in 2009. Now, let's make the statement "people can't run 100m in 9.58 seconds", a couple years earlier that was true for everybody, but someone worked and worked and achieved it. Maybe it will happen again, or even faster. But the overwhelming majority of people are physically unable to do it and will never do it, and Dosty believes the barriers to applying moral nihilism are just as physical (read: real).

>>7180836
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

I admire and am very interested in theology, especially Christianity, but don't feel capable of faith unless I have a broad knowledge of Christianity, which I do not at this point.

I wouldn't really describe myself as agnostic, simply ignorant, I think being a hard-line theist is much preferable and knowledgeable then being a hard-line atheist.

Any books that I might find interesting to read to help develop my views? Related stuff I've read already are:
- Select passages from KJ Bible
- Paradise Lost, Samson Agonistes
- beyond good and evil, thus spoke Zarathustra, human, all too human, the birth of tragedy
- The Republic

>>7180657
Goals are better positive than restrictive

>>7181254
I too prefer knowledgeable acupuncturists versus a person with common sense.

>>7181254
You should not give in to christianity. The alluring elements - faith, heaven, morality - are the road away from life and reality. Celebrate that you have no faith, do not intentionally mold you mind around the church.

>>7181423
putting your mind completely in reality creates discontentment

christianity is the only way to achieve true satisfaction with living

>>7180468
Alexander or Soren?

>>7181428
for yourself

>>7181382
Half are positive, half are negative.

Pretty balanced list of rules imo

>>7181409
>le epic analogy
>le appeal to common sense

atheism is anything but common sense, and religious faith isn't acupuncture, even if they were what shitty argument.

>>7180475
Faith does not require maturity.

>>7180694
This.

On an unrelated note, is it me or the sacrifice of Abraham for the absurdity of god request read today justifies religious terrorism?

>>7181844
Wut

>>7180517

> benefited

God is a the very core of his thought process.

>>7180475

/thread tbh

>>7181692
Proving my point

>>7180662

I never understood how this can be true when religions place punishments worse than nonexistence in thier frameworks.

How does one who genuinely believes in an eternal hell be it fire or the pain of the eternal separation from the source of all that is good that is for all intents and purposes nigh impossible to completely avoid, psychologically have an unconscious fear of the relatively tame nonexistence.

You might say well religious people don't think they are going to hell but that's irrelevant, for a person wo believes in a literal hell its a reality that is no necessarily in their control.

Atheism would be a comfort. You might not get heaven but you won't go to hell.

>>7180672

> Implying facing no judgment for your actions is not a comfort

But I do read.

The assigned readings for my course

Who knows how it will be when I have a jawb

>>7183093

I should say not impossible to avoid but easy to find yourself on the path to hell or similar according to religions

This theist shitposting is getting out of hand or has been for months now, really. When will it end?

>>7183093
Is there really a worse punishment than nonexistence?